Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

Morality of Obedience Vs Rebellion

Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2012 9:10:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Id like the raise a discussion on what is a moral virtue, Obedience or Rebellion and if a in-between both sometimes kind of answer how and why exactly? I tried doing this once before as I was kind of looking for answers to the question myself but I was not satisfied with the answers I got from the members of this website. It was mostly along the lines of "you obey if you think its right and rebel if you think its wrong". That"s not exactly really obeying, that"s just cooperating at your convenience. Your not really obeying anyone but yourself if this is your take on how to go at "obeying".
But recently I came to have a breack through in understanding this issue better ironically as a result of rewatching an episode of star treck the next generation. For you treck fans who cant already guess the episode it"s the one titled "the Pegesus".
In the episode Riker"s old Captain (guy who is John Lock on "Lost") and current Captain, Picard are sitting having a discussion about what they like about Riker and they name opposites attributes. It makes the old captain worry Riker has changed since he was his first officer and that he lost his virtuous aspects of loyalty and obedience.
Picard states he liked that Riker would stand up to his Captain if he was sure he was right.
Lock on the other hand stated a good first officer should follow his Captains orders, and that a Captain does not have time to always explain his commands, his first officer is got to trust him. All Picard says to this is "I"m aware of that".

In the end Riker has to remake a choice this episode. Many years ago he had been the only Obedient member of his crew with Captain Lock, the rest mutinied against him. The same events are happening that caused the first mutinied and Riker takes a stand against Lock and against his orders, and this is presumably the good and right kind of action of the episode, to Rebel not to be Obedient.
But In truth you cant simply say Riker "rebelled" and failed to "obey" because really he was being obedient. He was adhering to Federations Treaty with the Romulans, a law higher than the say of his former Captain now turned Admiral, and higher than the chiefs of security who gave him orders to keep these things a secret from Picard.
And in Truth it is Locks character, the old captain, who was the one Rebelling and not "following orders". He knew about the Treaty with Romulans but thought it weakened the federation and wanted to take it upon himself to create the technology the treaty strictly forbid development of.
In a way he "thought he was right" too like Riker when he would not help him start those experiments again. So why is Locks Rebellion wrong and Riker"s right?
Neither "rebellion" is right I have determined. It is the "obedience" that is right for one and not the other. The "obedience" to the "highest authority" is what determines who is in the moral right. Rebellion can be the greatest act of honor for a person but only if the Rebellion was out of True Obedience to some higher law than the authority the person rebelled against, for that is the most extreme test of your obedience to that highest law.
This fact is the bases of any belief is a real morality at all, an objective one. If murder is wrong just because you and I say its horrible, but Adam Lanza does not agree and went to murder as many children as possible, how can we tell him he"s wrong? Its flat out impossible to without appealing to a common authority, or a common standard that we both would be expected to universally need to meet. What Adam Lanza did was wrong. And it was not just wrong for those with the good sense to agree murder is wrong, its just as wrong for the gunman who did not understand it to be wrong.
So thus this shows we are all on a standard indifferent to our own views in terms of morality. And whatever the highest of the high"s is for standards that define what is Right and Wrong, this is the Last say "buck stops hear" authority on morality.
Now we can all argue over who or what that authority is beyond and outside of ourselves. If it"s a Darwinian genetic code for survival that defines the things most suited to aid survival as "right" and detrimental as "wrong" or if it"s the Christian God or some other God who set the standard of what is "moral".

Please tell me your thoughts. (also please forgive if you"re a trek fan for referring to Riker"s first captain as "Lock", I don"t remember his name from the actual star treck episode)
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2012 9:23:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Obedience is tricky and it depends on how you define it if I'm ever to give a coherent opinion. If you define it basically as submitting to an authority at the expense of your principles, I'd have to side with rebellion. Though I suppose that's a truism since we can probs always causally connect action with value i.e., if I don't value what I'm doing over the alternative than I wouldn't be doing it in the first place.

"The Rebel" by Camus is actually a pretty good look at the different ways people rebel and the kind of philosophy behind it. Apparently there are all sorts of different types.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2012 10:00:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/16/2012 9:23:35 PM, socialpinko wrote:
Obedience is tricky and it depends on how you define it if I'm ever to give a coherent opinion. If you define it basically as submitting to an authority at the expense of your principles, I'd have to side with rebellion. Though I suppose that's a truism since we can probs always causally connect action with value i.e., if I don't value what I'm doing over the alternative than I wouldn't be doing it in the first place.

yeah like Rikers former captain. He felt the treaty with the romulans crippled the federation in the balance of power so he rebeled against the treaty and started the cloaking experments.

but that rebellion would end in his court marshal for his failure to adhear to inter-space-federation law. While he was demanding the upmost obedience and unquestioned loyalty from Riker he himself failed to do what he demanded with the Treaty and the leaders higher ranking than him who signed it.

Did Benedict Arnold hold personally that his actions were right? obviously or he would not have made them, but he still goes down in history as the worst kind of traitor out there, meanwhile George Washington betrayal to his king makes him a hero when all Arnold betrayed was his commanding generals and the colony's elected leaders who's declared independence was obviously being disputed.

Washington however was admitted even by the king of england after the war was over to be the greatest man in history for just going back to his farm when the war was done and independence won when he could have become a new king, meanwhile Arnold's sour attitude from General Gates taking glory away from him in there mutual victory in saratoga is known historically. His motives for betrayal was no higher than the pillow talk whisperers of his wife and his self serving needs for vengeance for failure to be given praise in a battle.

Washington's actions came out of pure obedience to his christian values, and to his country that had declared its independence. His every motive could be described as a service to others and never himself.

Arnold's can only be described as serving to himself, and thus obedient to no-one except when it was at his convenience.

Washington was obedient
Arnold was a traitor.

'your own values' has to more than just 'your' values to be a moral thing to keep obedience to above the commands of other authorities.

"The Rebel" by Camus is actually a pretty good look at the different ways people rebel and the kind of philosophy behind it. Apparently there are all sorts of different types.

I will have to check out that book or at least see if I can find an outline of its gist somewhere I can read for free. out of curiosity does Camus write about the different philosophy's from an objective observation kind of standpoint or does he promote a particular one?
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
Dogknox
Posts: 5,039
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2012 11:14:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Marauder
Morals are not decided by the individual. Because each person would base his MORALS on his own experiences. Morals are NOT learned by experiences, they are TAUGHT!

It is Morally WRONG to have an abortion!!
But millions of them are done each year and justified by (distorted) morals!
FACT: It is Morally WRONG to not feed the hungry, or clothes the naked!

War crimes are JUDGED by the court, crimes against humanity and they are convicted not by what the guy THOUGHT was right but by what is MORALLY WRONG!

Dogknox
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2012 10:01:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/16/2012 11:14:25 PM, Dogknox wrote:
Marauder
Morals are not decided by the individual. Because each person would base his MORALS on his own experiences. Morals are NOT learned by experiences, they are TAUGHT!

It is Morally WRONG to have an abortion!!
But millions of them are done each year and justified by (distorted) morals!
FACT: It is Morally WRONG to not feed the hungry, or clothes the naked!

War crimes are JUDGED by the court, crimes against humanity and they are convicted not by what the guy THOUGHT was right but by what is MORALLY WRONG!

Dogknox

I think your confused as to which side I am on to this issue.......Objective Morality that is based on more than just what we 'think' is exactly what I am arguing for.

however I laid out an actual explained case for believing as I do that morality is objective and how there is little to know room for believing it otherwise, and how this issue bears down on how we look at rebellion as either wicked enough to put you in the lowest level of Hell or an act so great we of you we list you off in the same category as the saints.

you on the other hand, while you were just now under the impression I was arguing otherwise, chose to counter with a pious assertion.

you are not serving our master very well right now.

I would like it if you would read my opening post carefully and learn the kind of argument I was making for the logical necessity of a higher authority in the issue of morality. Try and use those in the future when you go argue our mutual side to those not on it
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
Dogknox
Posts: 5,039
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2012 10:30:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/17/2012 10:01:00 PM, Marauder wrote:
At 12/16/2012 11:14:25 PM, Dogknox wrote:
Marauder
Morals are not decided by the individual. Because each person would base his MORALS on his own experiences. Morals are NOT learned by experiences, they are TAUGHT!

It is Morally WRONG to have an abortion!!
But millions of them are done each year and justified by (distorted) morals!
FACT: It is Morally WRONG to not feed the hungry, or clothes the naked!

War crimes are JUDGED by the court, crimes against humanity and they are convicted not by what the guy THOUGHT was right but by what is MORALLY WRONG!

Dogknox

I think your confused as to which side I am on to this issue.......Objective Morality that is based on more than just what we 'think' is exactly what I am arguing for.

however I laid out an actual explained case for believing as I do that morality is objective and how there is little to know room for believing it otherwise, and how this issue bears down on how we look at rebellion as either wicked enough to put you in the lowest level of Hell or an act so great we of you we list you off in the same category as the saints.

you on the other hand, while you were just now under the impression I was arguing otherwise, chose to counter with a pious assertion.

you are not serving our master very well right now.

I would like it if you would read my opening post carefully and learn the kind of argument I was making for the logical necessity of a higher authority in the issue of morality. Try and use those in the future when you go argue our mutual side to those not on it
Marauder Thank for your reply.

I reply: Yes am in concert with you; My thoughts on what is moral are just that, MY Thoughts. As with all people, all have their own morals....
I agree with you...The problem is, not everyone is on the same page! Thus the need for an AUTHORITY, to tell the world the right morals.

The simple gauge for right morals are all that "up lift man"; Human dignity is the measure!
Not to get it mixed up with ETHICS: A set of principles of right conduct. I would think Ethics could include Abortion as a Set Principle, Morals would not!
MORALS: Personal principles, standards.

YOUR THOUGHTS!
Dogknox
DanielChristopherBlowes
Posts: 1,066
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2012 2:20:05 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/16/2012 9:10:50 PM, Marauder wrote:
Id like the raise a discussion on what is a moral virtue, Obedience or Rebellion and if a in-between both sometimes kind of answer how and why exactly? I tried doing this once before as I was kind of looking for answers to the question myself but I was not satisfied with the answers I got from the members of this website. It was mostly along the lines of "you obey if you think its right and rebel if you think its wrong". That"s not exactly really obeying, that"s just cooperating at your convenience. Your not really obeying anyone but yourself if this is your take on how to go at "obeying".
But recently I came to have a breack through in understanding this issue better ironically as a result of rewatching an episode of star treck the next generation. For you treck fans who cant already guess the episode it"s the one titled "the Pegesus".
In the episode Riker"s old Captain (guy who is John Lock on "Lost") and current Captain, Picard are sitting having a discussion about what they like about Riker and they name opposites attributes. It makes the old captain worry Riker has changed since he was his first officer and that he lost his virtuous aspects of loyalty and obedience.
Picard states he liked that Riker would stand up to his Captain if he was sure he was right.
Lock on the other hand stated a good first officer should follow his Captains orders, and that a Captain does not have time to always explain his commands, his first officer is got to trust him. All Picard says to this is "I"m aware of that".

In the end Riker has to remake a choice this episode. Many years ago he had been the only Obedient member of his crew with Captain Lock, the rest mutinied against him. The same events are happening that caused the first mutinied and Riker takes a stand against Lock and against his orders, and this is presumably the good and right kind of action of the episode, to Rebel not to be Obedient.
But In truth you cant simply say Riker "rebelled" and failed to "obey" because really he was being obedient. He was adhering to Federations Treaty with the Romulans, a law higher than the say of his former Captain now turned Admiral, and higher than the chiefs of security who gave him orders to keep these things a secret from Picard.
And in Truth it is Locks character, the old captain, who was the one Rebelling and not "following orders". He knew about the Treaty with Romulans but thought it weakened the federation and wanted to take it upon himself to create the technology the treaty strictly forbid development of.
In a way he "thought he was right" too like Riker when he would not help him start those experiments again. So why is Locks Rebellion wrong and Riker"s right?
Neither "rebellion" is right I have determined. It is the "obedience" that is right for one and not the other. The "obedience" to the "highest authority" is what determines who is in the moral right. Rebellion can be the greatest act of honor for a person but only if the Rebellion was out of True Obedience to some higher law than the authority the person rebelled against, for that is the most extreme test of your obedience to that highest law.
This fact is the bases of any belief is a real morality at all, an objective one. If murder is wrong just because you and I say its horrible, but Adam Lanza does not agree and went to murder as many children as possible, how can we tell him he"s wrong? Its flat out impossible to without appealing to a common authority, or a common standard that we both would be expected to universally need to meet. What Adam Lanza did was wrong. And it was not just wrong for those with the good sense to agree murder is wrong, its just as wrong for the gunman who did not understand it to be wrong.
So thus this shows we are all on a standard indifferent to our own views in terms of morality. And whatever the highest of the high"s is for standards that define what is Right and Wrong, this is the Last say "buck stops hear" authority on morality.
Now we can all argue over who or what that authority is beyond and outside of ourselves. If it"s a Darwinian genetic code for survival that defines the things most suited to aid survival as "right" and detrimental as "wrong" or if it"s the Christian God or some other God who set the standard of what is "moral".

Please tell me your thoughts. (also please forgive if you"re a trek fan for referring to Riker"s first captain as "Lock", I don"t remember his name from the actual star treck episode)



Depends whom you serve;

Satan, the devil, the 'prince of this world'..

Or Jesus Christ, the King of kings..

To be obedient to one is to rebel against the other.
Everyone on the side of Truth listens to Me. (Jesus Christ)
Maikuru
Posts: 9,112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2012 2:33:11 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
When Star Trek is included in a discussion, it should really be part of the title.
"You assume I wouldn't want to burn this whole place to the ground."
- lamerde

https://i.imgflip.com...
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2012 2:41:56 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
"Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man's original virtue. It is through disobedience that progress has been made, through disobedience and through rebellion."
~ Oscar Wilde

You said it. To only obey when you agree is simply cooperation.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
DanielChristopherBlowes
Posts: 1,066
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2012 2:44:37 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/18/2012 2:41:56 AM, FREEDO wrote:
"Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man's original virtue. It is through disobedience that progress has been made, through disobedience and through rebellion."
~ Oscar Wilde

You said it. To only obey when you agree is simply cooperation.

No, one act of disobedience created all the darkness and evil in the world; one life of total obedience created a path back to eternity and God.
Everyone on the side of Truth listens to Me. (Jesus Christ)
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2012 8:31:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/18/2012 2:33:11 AM, Maikuru wrote:
When Star Trek is included in a discussion, it should really be part of the title.

you know something your absolutely right! I will remember that the next time haha :)

you know I heard once there was a college professor who had his entire philosophy class going through Star Trek episodes one by one.
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2012 8:58:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/18/2012 2:41:56 AM, FREEDO wrote:
"Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man's original virtue. It is through disobedience that progress has been made, through disobedience and through rebellion."
~ Oscar Wilde

You said it. To only obey when you agree is simply cooperation.

Yes but theres something to be said for obeying when perhaps you cant be said to agree since you have not thought on it enough to firmly say you have the same conclusion; but you obey regardless because you trust the authority and the system that has it in place. You give the due respect to present status of power, realizing your ways and your thoughts are not the center of the universe.

by that I refer back to the star trek episode. Lock disobeyed the Treaty the Federation made with Romulans. He pointedly believed the Treaty was a mistake and clokeing tech should be pursed. He was not ignorant of the issue, but the fact that he demanded the Federation try and increase its status in the balance of power shows he believes in the Federation and that they should have that higher status.

if he respects the Federation as his sovereign nation that he not only owes his allegiance to but wishes to use his resources to promote it, then what would have been right would be to adhere to the Federation Law, including its Treaty made with the romulans.

His rebellion is caused though by not respecting that sovereign authority of the Federation Law, placing his own judgement ahead of the will of 2 entire cosmic governments, and put them at jeopardy of starting a war with each other neither wanted to get into.

In a way he's being the Tyrant a Rebel try's to disobey because his rebellion is not the liberation of a peoples choice from a higher power, its trying to make himself the higher power to impose his own will on the whole cosmic nation of the Federation.

you cant call this rebellion a virtue at any stretch of the imagination.

the problem is with Obedience to comply with it, part of its virtue is it rewards you with no incident occurring when one could have taken place had you been insubordinate. So your virtuous act goes unnoticed. the only way your action of obedience can stand out and go noticed is when to do so you have to rebel against some other imposing power.

While many of histories heroes are Rebels and Revolutionary's, you cant just say its our oldest virtue when all throughout history the term 'Traitor' has been reserved for those said to be kept in the lowest level of Hell.

So I would say we should conclude that...

To obey in agreement is easy and no special task
To obey in disagreement is more difficult but its still a count of good character to do so
And To obey in opposition to a 3rd party that demands you obey it instead, this obedience is the only 'rebellion' that is rightfully called a virtue, This is an obedience that is tested the most.
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2012 9:04:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/18/2012 2:44:37 AM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 12/18/2012 2:41:56 AM, FREEDO wrote:
"Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man's original virtue. It is through disobedience that progress has been made, through disobedience and through rebellion."
~ Oscar Wilde

You said it. To only obey when you agree is simply cooperation.

No, one act of disobedience created all the darkness and evil in the world; one life of total obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

well said.

actually this statement is so wonderfully phrased I'm putting it in my signature.

although with one change cause I want people think about that word that hits their ear's like sugar when they read it in context with the rest of the statement.
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
DanielChristopherBlowes
Posts: 1,066
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2012 2:26:17 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/18/2012 9:04:49 PM, Marauder wrote:
At 12/18/2012 2:44:37 AM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 12/18/2012 2:41:56 AM, FREEDO wrote:
"Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man's original virtue. It is through disobedience that progress has been made, through disobedience and through rebellion."
~ Oscar Wilde

You said it. To only obey when you agree is simply cooperation.

No, one act of disobedience created all the darkness and evil in the world; one life of total obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

well said.

actually this statement is so wonderfully phrased I'm putting it in my signature.

although with one change cause I want people think about that word that hits their ear's like sugar when they read it in context with the rest of the statement.

Thank you.
Everyone on the side of Truth listens to Me. (Jesus Christ)